Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T 16-35 F2.8 ZA SSM  reviews

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Jozioau   review date: January-28-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 16-80mm Vario-sonar
Sigma 10-20mm
CZ 24-70mm Vario-sonar

price paid:

AU$1,275 shop demo

positive:

Solid build, fine optics and coatings, constant f2.8 max aperture, quick and silent SSM focusing without lens extension.

negative:

Weight and price, but well balanced on camera bodies a900 and a700, especially with VCG.

comment:

Superbly crafted ultra wide angle lens, comparable in build and optical quality to its sibling the CZ 24-70mm f2.8. Beautiful image quality, natural colour rendering, very sharp, quick to lock focus.
Consistent with the other CZ Vario-sonar T* lenses I've used, there's an almost polarizing filter 'zing' about the colours and the images are truly vibrant.
Used mainly indoors so far, so flare control has not been fully tested. Slight barrel distortion noticeable on interiors shots at the 16mm end on full frame camera.
A good zoom range for architectural photography, as well as for sweeping landscapes.
On an APSC body the range becomes more of a 'walkabout' 24-52mm equivalent when you need that f2.8 maximum constant aperture in low light.
A big investment but definitely a keeper.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 2 

user: godsakes   review date: December-04-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sigma 12-24mm
Sigma 10-20mm
KM 17-35mm
Min 24mm

positive:

Sharpest of it's class
Wonderful colour
SSM
can create great sunstars

negative:

Heavy as hell
Cripplingly expensive
Suction effect with filter on

comment:

First impressions, there's little doubt about in my mind, this is the sharpest of it's class, noticeably crisper than it's competition, good even wide open, with decent corners but not the sharpest lens ever (probably should be rated at around 4.25 for sharpness) i.e. it's not going to match the macro lenses but then it's unrealistic to expect it to, as if you start to compare macro lenses to most UWA lenses the UWA lenses will generally look like mush, the CZ still appears crisp.

If you don't need the range and speed then lenses like the minolta 24mm can hold their own against it at around f8 but at f2.8-4.5 the CZ blows them out of the water.

Colours are much nicer than the typical yellow cast of the sigma lenses or indeed the clinical soulless colours from the tamron made lenses.

If you stop down you can create amazing looking sunstars.

Great build quality but for the money I would have liked to see weather sealing. It's nice that it does not extend when zooming but it does create a resistive suction feeling if you have a lens filter on top trapping the airflow.

Like most lenses of it's class it's quite weak to flare, the modern sigma ultra wide lenses like the 10-20 or 12-24 are far more flare resistant but they are unusually good (ironic given I tend to find sigma telephoto lenses more prone to flare than the competition), the flare on the CZ is fairly typical of of it class, lenses like the KM 17-35mm fair no better.

As everyone else has mentioned this is heavy as hell and will cost you a arm and a leg. If you can live with that then go for it, if you want value for money don't even look at it.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: lifeispixels   review date: December-03-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4
Sony 20mm f2.8
Tokina 17mm f3.5
Tokina 19-35 f3.5-4.5
Tokina 11-16 f2.8 apsc
Tamron 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 apsc

price paid:

1600 usd mint 2 hand

positive:

- Sharp across the frame
- Excellent colors
- silent & quick focusing

negative:

- Very heavy
- Hefty price tag

comment:

I think it's easy to review this lens, because there is nothing better in this class than the CZ 16-35 when you're looking for an ultra wide angle lens to use with Sony's full frame cameras. This is the best UWA lens period if you can afford its hefty price. I give the CZ 16-35 all fives because I only compare it to the lens of the same class. It would not be fair to compare sharpness, flare, distortion to lenses from other ranges and they're built differently and good UWAs is harder to design than 24-70 or primes.

This is the sharpest UWA lens I have used. Excellent center sharpness and the corners will match up stopped down. Colors are excellent and has that neutral Zeiss signature to it. The lens barrel is well made but very heavy.

Barrel distortion is mild at widest angle and can be easily correct in PP or camera's built in correction if you shoot jpegs. CA exists but it's mild magenta/green type that is easily removed in lightroom.

I give 5 for flare because we're talking about UWA lenses and flare is usually the main problem for lenses with such wide angle. CZ 16-35 handles flare very well. You can still see some ring flare and ghost bobs here and there when strong light sources are in the frame but it's much better controlled and looks not quite ugly than other alternatives. When presented with strong light coming directly, CZ 16-35 still maintains surprisingly great contrast and colors, while other lenses suffer.

The Tamron/Minolta 17-35 flares a LOT! By a lot I mean the flare streak can be so ugly I discard the images. Contrast is reduced. The Tokina 19-35 suffers a lot from flare, it can be so bad the images are blown white and destroys the contrast.

The Tokina 17mm f3.5 is very well resistant to flare, good sharpness although lacks just a bit behind this CZ. The problem is slightly wavy mustache distortion which can be seen sometimes. And the way it renders colors is thicker like oil paint. The CZ gives more lifelike and neutral tone.

Sony 20mm f2.8 is also an excellent alternative. The color rendition is closer to this CZ16-35 than others. Good sharpness across the frame and good resistant to flare. Slight reduction of fine micro contrast details compared to the CZ and I only observe mild distortion. The only problem is it doesn't go as wide as 16mm but if you can live with this limitation, it's a good choice and much lighter than 16-35.

In conclusion, if you're serious about landscape, photojournalism, and ready to invest for the best possible UWA currently available to alpha FF cameras. The 16-35 CZ is the only choice. And don't compare this to 24-70 CZ as it's totally different type and serves entirely different purposes. As Exif info from images that win Reuters' 2012 photos of the year reveals, most images are shot with 16-35 lens, followed by 70-200, while so little is made with 24-70 which the editors seem to consider boring angles.

See my photos with Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T 16-35 F2.8 ZA SSM at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeispixels/collections/72157628204412995/

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: slawrencephoto   review date: November-03-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Not compared to any other lens.

positive:

Build quality
IQ
CA control
Does not extend when zooming
A gem to use on a full frame camera

negative:

heavy but then that is expected from a quality lens
fringing when you have a UV and CP filter on at the same time.
Expensive but worth every penny

comment:

This lens has transformed my landscape and church photography. The quality of the images is produces are outstanding. It is a heavy but solid lens and works well with my A850 and A99.

It is expensive but in my mind worth every penny.

The link below will take you to my Flickr set dedicated to this lens.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/slawrencephotography/sets/72157632147898030

Si

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: adrianz   review date: July-13-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 24-70

price paid:

1600 USD (new)

positive:

Color
Contrast
Fast and silent AF

negative:

Weight
Distortion

comment:

I love the internal zoom and the very short minimum focus distance. Paired with B+W UV filter since day one and have almost no vignetting at 16mm.

The best wide zoom for Sony Alpha. Period.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: pwkk   review date: March-23-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

24-70 cz

price paid:

$1250AUS

positive:

SSM
Solid lense

negative:

Tends to miss focus

comment:

Had a really good experience with the 24-70cz and wanted the same with the wider angle, so I went for it.

Really happy with this lens, great colors and beautiful images. Just doesn't seem to have that same pop as the 24-70cz but I still love the results.

I do have a slight issue with focusing a it often misses the mark and needs manual adjustment. Not sure if it's due to using it on the A55 but I really want to try it on a new FF when released. When focus is hit, images are sharp.

Obviously weight is an issue, but that's something I'm willing to live with.

Highly recommended.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Stormvogel   review date: March-22-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

24-70 cz
70-200 Minolta
135 cz

price paid:

1299 (new)

positive:

All, and that is not what I expected.
build, focus speed, F2.8 all the way.

negative:

none.

comment:

There are no negative's for me.
And that has one reason, I use DXO module.
Vignetting gone.
Sharpess, good.
Distortion gone.
And then go to LR.
I bought this lens, because off this program.
By the day, I get more happy with this lens.
And my 24-70 cz I use less.
But this review is for apc, I hope it does also well on the A99.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: a850   review date: January-23-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 35/1.4G

price paid:

GBP 1200

positive:

Build quality
Focus speed and accuracy
Very flexible focal length
Constant 2.8
Awesome sunstars if you stop down

negative:

Distortion
Some ghosts
Vignette at 16mm

comment:

I *love* this lens.

Build quality is exceptional. The zoom ring is stiff but smooth. The lens doesn't extend at all when zooming or focusing. The filter thread doesn't rotate, nor does the focus ring. The focus ring is perfectly geared if you want to do video or manual focus on film cameras which don't support SSM. The whole thing is a solid metal tank. Even the lens hood is metal.

I took mine across Peru for a month. It went through extreme cold (-20), direct sunlight, dusty high altitude mountains, the amazon river and rainforest, got caught in a torrential storm etc. Not a single problem ever. Every single picture was sharp, focused and beautiful. The lens and my a850 got seriously wet for 2 hours in a rain storm. Even though it doesn't claim weather sealing, no problems at all.

The lens is sharp and SUPER contrasty. Zeiss have done something amazing with lens coatings, because it is VERY hard to make this lens wash out and lose contrast. The amount of detail it captures in a wide view is absolutely amazing, and the contrast brings out a lot of texture.

I find the colour balance quite cool and blue. Especially compared to the 35/1.4 and 85/1.4. I checked this with an X-rite colorpassport, and sure enough there is about 200K difference in white balance between the lenses. For landscapes, this is great, but not so much for portraits - although of course you can correct them later.

16mm is amazing for interiors, landscapes or anything else you want to capture. There is inevitable distortion though. 24mm is standard "wide" on full frame, and performs amazingly well with almost no distortion. 35 is probably the weakest performance of this lens, with more distortion and worse corner performance at 2.8.

There is some vignette at 16mm, as you would expect. But the details are still there, so it's easy to recover in post-process. The extreme corners have a kinda "tearing" effect where the subjects are distorted. This isn't really a fault of the lens, since 16mm is ultra-wide. As Kurt Munger showed, if you distortion correct the corners, the detail is still there.

You get awesome 18 point sunstars when stopped down to f16 or f22. If you shoot right into the sun, you will get some multi-coloured ghosts across the image. But actually I think they look ok - quite attractive as far as flare goes. It doesn't ruin or wash out the image either.

With steadshot enabled, you can hand-hold this lens for ages. 1/4s at 16mm is no problem at all if you hold the camera still.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: NIKO   review date: November-14-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 16-80 f3.5-4.5 ZA

positive:

Build, SSM, Constant f2.8 Aperture, AF accuracy

negative:

Having a filter on causes a "suction" effect when zooming from 16mm and 35mm. Otherwise, none.

comment:

This Zeiss lens is a great companion to my Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 24-70 f2.8 ZA SSM. When compared to my Zeiss 16-80 it is quite apparent that it's focus is by far more accurate at the 16mm end than the Zeiss 16-80. I suspect that having an f2.8 aperture helps since the f2.8 sensor is activated on my A700 when using this or any lens that has a constant f2.8 aperture. I also feel that the SSM also is a more accurate way to focus the lens than the original screw-drive system when the lens has a very short throw.

Sharpness is great. However, as usual I will give it only a 4.5 since it is not a prime lens and the sharpest lens I have is truly my Sigma 70 f2.8 EX DG Macro. Color is great and quite neutral and contrast is excellent. Naturally, there is some barrel distortion on the wide end even with an APS-C sensor and flare control can be a problem depending on the photographic situation.

The Build is great as is the SSM. My only beef with the lens is that when you put a filter on a "suction" effect is created when turning the zoom ring from 16mm or 35mm. Take the filter off and there is no problem. This is due to the fact that the front element retracts back then forward during zooming behind the filter threads. No big deal. I just found it an odd feeling on the zoom ring is all.

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: minolta mad   review date: August-27-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM 17-35
CZ 24-70
70-200G
100 macro
135 STF

price paid:

£1300

positive:

Fast and silent AF
Colours
Doesnt extend when zooming
Poor IQ at 16mm

negative:

No better than my KM 17-35 that i was intending to replace. The corner sharpness is better, but at f/11 - f/13 its not as sharp as the KM.

comment:

I waited 2 years to get this lens and less than 48 hours after owning it, it was returned and my money refunded. Its just not that good at 16mm. 20mm and beyond its suoerb, but alot of my shooting is at 17mm.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: romke   review date: January-25-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

1300 EURO

positive:

sharp, versatile in crowded spaces, good color

negative:

heavy, expensive, bulky, you need to be very close to your subject

comment:

a very nice lens for crowded spaces. the sharpness is such that images can be cropped quite a lot when you want to. the best way to use it is to get as close as possible though, and that is really close indeed.

it takes some time to get used to, when you start you tend to stay to far away of your subject. once you get the hang of it, it makes it possible to obtain shots that cannot be made with standard focal lengths.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 1 

user: Defender   review date: January-20-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 12-24

price paid:

1800 USD (new)

positive:

Fast focus
Sharper than the Sigma

negative:

Flare and allot of it
The little button on the side of the lens for focus is easily switched

comment:

I bought this lens as a replacement for the Sigma 12-24 that I owned almost 2 years. I wanted to have a wider zoom range and was willing to offer some amount on the wide side to have a little more on the tele side. In comparison of sharpness between the 2, Zeiss is the real winner, especially in the center; but it is not by much but still good visible.

The Zeiss is focussing very fast even in dark places and I have to use seldom a torch to help it focus. The Sigma did it not so good and often was wrong focused.

The real bad thing about the Zeiss is that it produces allot of flare. In many situations inside buildings it is even not usable. The Sigma being much wider did a much much better job of it.

If you need a wide zoom lens for using inside industrial sites and challenging light conditions I would stay away from the Zeiss because of the flair, although the color and sharpness is better on the Zeiss, it doesn't rectify the high price that you have to pay for.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: seevve   review date: January-04-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- 24-70za
- Minolta 17-35/2.8-4
- primes

price paid:

trades

positive:

+ Build quality
+ sharpness stopped down to F8-F11
+ bokeh is great for wide angle zoom
+ SSM (Fast and silent focusing)

negative:

- sharpness wide open in corners and at 28-35 not perfect
- High vignetting at widest focal lengths
- non weather resistant

comment:

16-35F2.8 ZA impressive wide angle zoom. I have this lens near a half year. Sold because don't use it often and to buy 24/2. But have good trip with this lens to Egypt.

This lens have best build quality if compare zoom only for a-mount. Size of lens is constant, fells in hand very good. Fast and silent focusing.

IQ is good very good for landscapes. Images have good colors and detailed, than lens stopped down. Corners and bokeh are better than from 24-70. But sharpness wide open is not impressive. More other for my personal taste this lens have better bokeh than 35G. (Don't have much experience with 24/2 to compare right now). CA may easily corrcted in software (ACR, LR. DXO have profiles for this lens).

I don't cityscape shoot, but seems that distortion well controlled.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: voets   review date: November-23-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sigma 15-30

price paid:

1300 eur

positive:

ultrasharp
f2.8 aperture
nice wide angle range

negative:

weight, price

comment:

I decided to sell my Sigma 15-30 and buy this lens.
The sigma is slightly wider, but the CZ rocks in sharpness and has f2.8 over the entire zoom range.
Like all wide angle lenses there will be some distortion, especially at the wide end, but it's pretty well controlled on this lens.

The size is similar to the CZA24-70 so prepare to carry around some weight.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: napo   review date: November-17-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Wide on FF, color, sharp,

negative:

Heavy , expensive

comment:

This lens loves A900 a lot. And A900 adore this lens even more. I use this lens a lot since I bought it. The wide perspective on FF is just amazing. From all my wide angle lenses I used to have, this lens is the best. After seeing my photos with this lens - 75% of all photos are taken between 16-22mm. At 35mm I noticed it is little bit soft when wide open2.8f, but from 3.5 is sharp again. Great for landscape, indoor, people........ Must have lens for FF

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Rno.   review date: November-10-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tam 11-18
CZ 16-80
Sony 35/1.4

price paid:

1479 USD new, fm HK

positive:

Overall performance
Solidity

negative:

weight
Color rendition

comment:

If the weight and solidity won't impress you, the images will. Crisp, juicy, if a bit cool on the WB, and no excessive distortion or flare. Unsharpness in corners can't be denied, but is not an issue for most subjects. The heavy vignetting is! Very acceptable bokeh when you get it (like at 35/2.8).

(edited to remove the lens contact issue--it was a phantom issue)

The reason why I don't give it all fives is because I try to keep the label and Zeiss image out of this and just look at it as a plain, black lens ;)
Me thinks that some reviewers believe, it is a Zeiss, so it must get all fives. Hello!

Oh, and whoever complains about the price, that is something you can definitely expect from a Zeiss! Actually, I think it is very reasonably priced for a Zeiss. If only the performance were in line...

The finely ribbed rings are already collecting dust. Thank you, Sony! My old fingers also can't quickly distinguish them from the rest of the body.

Edit: after some more exposure (no pun intended) I noticed serious flare issues, even if the sun is not within the frame. Shielding the front element from the sun with one hand will make the difference clear. This led to a down-grade of the flare rating.

Also, horizontal distortion is significant at the 16mm end. I can't really imagine any non-fisheye lens of that FL being much or even any better, but it is what it is: distorted. Therefore only a "4".

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Christoph   review date: November-06-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Carl Zeiss - Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5
Carl Zeiss - Vario-Sonnar T* 24-70 F2.8 ZA SSM

price paid:

new

positive:

excellent build; silent, accurate and really fast AF; internal zoom; close-focus ability;

negative:

no dust- or water-sealing; price; more than one time i changed AF/MF by accident; little softness in extreme corners at full aperture on long end; light fall-off wide open;

comment:

Colors and contrast are simply great. Bokeh seems to be quite nice. There is possibility to use filters on this lens. This is an extremely well built lens.
SAL-1635Z is the perfect ultra wide angle landscape lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: K-Man   review date: July-18-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 17-35 D f 2.8-4
Sigma 10-20 EX DG 4-5.6

price paid:

1460 USD

positive:

Sharpness, Flare, Color, Silent focus, Build

negative:

Weight, Price

comment:

I paid $ 208.00 for my 17-35 D f 2.8-4, brand new in the box. It has been a great lens and I have taken many wonderful photos with it over the years,(or so I thought).

So a few folks, myself possibly included, were wunnerin' if I might need ta' have my head examined for goin' an' spendin' sumthin' like seven times as much for a lens that seems ta' be just about tha' same thing?

Day one I was shooting sequential photos at the Skate park and there was a very noticable difference between the Zeiss 16-35 f 2.8 SSM lens and the Min 17-35 D 2.8-4,(my "old" walk-about lens).
The SSM focus is slightly faster and seems to "track" moving objects better. The tack sharpness of the CZ 16-35 over the Min 17-35 D is readily apparent, especially in the corners. The CZ's color seems to differ slightly from the Minolta's,(I like it). The CZ lens is longer and double the weight of the Minolta, which some folks might find cumbersome, but for me it actually seems to balance out my camera a little nicer,(a700 w/VG-C70AM).

So far this lens has been worth every darn penny I paid for it. It's a keeper!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Swisskiter   review date: June-29-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Kit Lens 18-55
Kit Lens 55-200
G 70-400

price paid:

2750 CHF

positive:

F 2.8
very fast and silent SSM
every thing realy!

negative:

haven't found any thing yet

comment:

Great Lens as expectet from Zeiss and at that Price!
If you have the Money for it get it!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: marc-104   review date: June-27-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

color
sharpness
build

negative:

edge, corner sharpness at 16mm

comment:

DXO optics pro can really improve the raw processed at 16mmm with this lens

this is one of the reason for me for using this software versus Lightroom

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: TxllxT   review date: June-15-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 28-135

price paid:

1375EURO(new)

positive:

- first class well controlled 'neutrality', unobtrusiveness
- versatility in most light conditions, both inside & outside
- with cropping you get all the zoom pics you want: sharp & telling

negative:

Good for the muscles

comment:

First impressions compared to my old trusted Minolta AF 28-135: Colour, Sharpness, Weight offer a very familiar feeling. The AF 28-135 introduces 'enhancements', whereas the Zeiss has a constant edge on being/staying more natural. Flare is a big issue on the AF 28-135, a small issue on the Zeiss. Keeping your hand on the sunny side helps with immediate effect on the Zeiss in situations that just became unsolvable for the AF 28-135. The AF 28-135 is a typical outdoor walkabout objective for the big & faraway, the Zeiss takes you inside, lets you come close (30 cm) to whatever attracts the eye. I was looking for an objective that meets the eye; you see something and the Zeiss will capture it without trouble.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: zfcentral   review date: June-10-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Nikkor 14-24
Nikkor 17-35

price paid:

1490 USD NEW

positive:

+Color
+Contrast
+Center performance

negative:

-Extreme corners could be better

comment:

Will update this, as iv used the lens more.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: palmerop   review date: April-15-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 D 2695-110

price paid:

1400 USD (used)

positive:

Visibly better resolution than the Minolta AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 D. Fast (as always with wide angle lenses) and silent focus. Internal focusing.

negative:

comment:

This lens has visibly better resolution than the Minolta AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 D I owned. The fast (as always with wide angle lenses) and silent focusing is also a plus.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Aleq   review date: April-14-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 10-20 on A700

price paid:

1310 EUR (new, HK)

positive:

* Sharp (like prime, starting right from 2.8 in the center)

negative:

* Heavy
* Vignetting

comment:

It is really at least one class higher than 10-20. Unfortunately, this applies to the size and weight as well. I'd prefer less resistance while using zoom and focusing rings. It is much stiffer compared to SAL70200G. But nothing you couldn't live with.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: hooni   review date: March-22-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

M28/2
M35/2
M28-135/4-4.5

price paid:

$1750 USD (new)

positive:

Focus range,ZA colors,Cheaper than combined prices of available primes,Internal focusing,Focus speed and accuracy.

negative:

Flare on the 16mm end but to be expected. Would have loved 16-50 but that would have hurt the CZ24-70 market. :(

comment:

I have recently aquired both the 28 and 35 original primes and found the CZ 16-35 to be quite comparible at their respective distances. I enjopy the focus speed much more on the zoom but the weight of the primes is minimal. The 35/2 can be used for portraits much easier than the 16-35, but I find it impossible to replace the 16-20mm ability when standing directly unmderneath something like the Mission Earth ride at Epcot! There are just certain times and situations I believe the CZ16-35 would be invaluable. The price is very justifiable when you compare the cost of a 16mm Fish, and the 20,28,and 35 F2 primes combined. I believe the capabilities to be very simlar, (minus some portrait plus for the 35/2). Overall I am very happy with the lense from vacation and look forward to using it for landscape during my next trip to Colorado. I will update my review once I have completely compared it to my newly aquired 28/2 and 35/2.

Price includes tax, shipping, and 5 year extended warranty

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: GramParsons   review date: March-13-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 24-70

price paid:

L1199

positive:

Sharpness
Colour
contrast

negative:

Expensive
Heavy

comment:

I love this lens. Internal zoom avoids some of the gripes I have with the CZ 24-70. It's capable of incredible images, sharpness and colour are good and it's my favourite for landscape.

Handling edges the CZ 24-70 which handles well. Costs a fortune but you get what you pay for, just don't tell your girlfriend how much... The best wide zoom for the alpha mount. Thank you Sony and Zeiss.

Some people have issues with the use of plastic, personally it really doesn't bother me.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Ocular   review date: March-02-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 15-30

price paid:

1899 USD (new)

positive:

Very sharp at TA
Fast and silent AF
Great colors
Very low distortion

negative:

comment:

This is an extremely well built lens. The size and weight are not extreme for a FF compatible f/2.8 lens. Its balance is perfect with my A-900. When I use the AF it is quick, accurate and silent. For landscapes, I normally set the focus manually and so appreciate the fluid and positive action of the controls. There is no slop in the zoom or focus functions. I previously owned the Sigma 15-30, which was a fine lens however; the CZ beats it hands down. I haven’t checked the bokeh since I purchased the lens primarily for the close focus capability coupled with the extreme DOF it provides. This lens has performed flawlessly in the hot 98% humidity of Florida’s marsh to the sub-zero snow filled canyons of Utah.

I’m completely satisfied with this lens I do recommend it to fellow photographers.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: beppe61   review date: February-06-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 20mm f2.8 RS, Minolta 28mm f2.8, Minolta 17-35mm f2.8/4, CZ 24-70mm f2.8

price paid:

1300 euro (new)

positive:

Very sharp at TA
Fast and silent AF
Great colors
Very low distortion, even at 16mm TA

negative:

None

comment:

I think this is a must have wide-zoom.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: tobyjay   review date: January-09-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 15-30
Minolta 24/2.8
Sigma 10-20/3.5 HSM
Sony 35/1.4
Tamron 17-50/2.8

price paid:

L1000 + tax hong kong

positive:

Sharpness
Colour and contrast
Silent, accurate AF
More amazing technically than CZ24-70

negative:

Big and heavy.

comment:

Remarkable lens. Better image quality (on crop A700) than any other wide I've used. In particular, colours are excellent with none of the cast which Sigma and even Tamron suffer from. Contrast is good frm f/2.8 onwards, sharpness beats the 24/2.8 prime!
Much better in terms of distortion than the Tamron and the Sigma 15-30. Much less flare than the 15-30.
Sharpness is impossible to beat, especially around the 17, 18mm mark. Wide angle, wide open is great on full-frame.
Sigma 10-20 seems like a toy compared to this beauty.

It's a big brute of a lens, the same size as a CZ24-70 but it doesn't extend like the longer zoom does. If you can live with the size and weight then it can't be beat.
Works beautifully with flash, very accurate exposures and silent, accurate autofocus. I don't use the hood in case it blocks the AF illuminator.
For low light portraits I switch to the Sony 35/1.4 which gives nicer skin tones and bokeh at that focal length. For everything wider this is impossible to beat, unless portability is important.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: brettyboy56   review date: December-23-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 24-70, Min 50 1.7

price paid:

1800.00 USD (NEW)

positive:

Very Sharp for a WA, Great colors, Focus Quick and Silent, Great Perspective, Little Distortion, F2.8, Solid, Great Build.

negative:

Little Heavy. Some minor distortion at 16mm, would give it a 4.5 if i could.

comment:

Great Lens, the first time looking through this on my new A850 i was amazed. Colors are great and lens is fast in all aspects (aperture, focus, ect). Paired with the CZ 24-70 you cannot go wrong.

I have a B+W UV Filter on my lens and have not noticed any vignetting that others have mentioned. I will be going out this weekend into real world scenarios and will update and post test photos in the forums.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: zozo   review date: November-02-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 28-75 mm / 2,8

price paid:

1600 Euro

positive:

- sharp
- color

negative:

- price

comment:

Super sharp, beautiful color, heavy construction

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: jerome   review date: September-12-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 12-24, Minolta 20mm.

positive:

Image quality.

negative:

Weight, size, price.

comment:

This is easily one of the best zoom lenses in the Sony line-up. The micro-contrast and sharpness are breathtaking. The colors are great, but noticeably cooler than the ones from classic Minolta glass (but this is nothing which can't be corrected in post).

It is an extraordinary lens, much more so than the 24-70 for example.

Some people criticized the corner sharpness. The extreme corner sharpness -or rather lack of it- of the 16-35 is not a problem in real life use on the A900, only the EXTREME corners are somewhat unsharp when the lens is wide opened. The old Minolta 20mm prime is indeed a bit better in this respect, but there are very, very few subjects on which it matters.

The lens is big and heavy.

You can use filters on this lens, but it makes little sense. As on any lens this wide, you need very thin filters and they will degrade the side of the frame a bit (think at which angle the light rays go through the glass on the side...).

AF is fast, silent and accurate, but who cares on a wide-angle? ;)

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: thePiRaTE!!   review date: September-06-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 15/2.8, 24/1.8 EX DG, Zeiss T*25/2.8 Distagon ZK, Zeiss 24/2 Distagon ZA, Pentax FA 31/1.8.

price paid:

1950CAD(new)

positive:

- Solid build
- IQ (color, contrast, sharpness)
- SSM Auto-focus
- Internal zoom
- Manual focusing resulting from SSM is decent for an AF design.
- 1:4.2 life scale @ MFD (35mm)
- Nice lens hood.

negative:

- Price, though you get what you pay for.

comment:

Well built - good balance of weight saving and metal material. For a lens covering 16-35 at 2.8, with as solid a construction as it offers, the weight is totally reasonable and easily hand-holdable for a day of shooting. I've done it, and while noticing slight fore-arm fatigue after several hours, the shots I took home were well worth it.
IQ - Color is rich, contrast and sharpness right from 2.8 are great. Highly resistant to flare, no readily visible chromatic aberration. Distortion is minor at long and wide ends and flat at 24. Vignette is mild but present from 2.8, moreso at the 16mm side.

Auto-focus - Silent and fast. Accurate in good light, though mine needs an occasional manual nudge indoors with low light.
Manual focus - SSM mechanism does away with the screw-driven AF gear coupled with the ring, leaving it much smoother and with no play when changing direction. A somewhat damped feel - nice to use! Not greased perfection like many manual lenses, but the best manual action than any auto-focusing lens I've used to date.
Internal zoom - much less worry of dust finding its way in while outdoors. Have spent hours at a rugged outdoor event in the brush with this lens and noted not a spec of dust as a consequence.
Close-focus - Under a foot with 1:4.2 life scale at 35mm, adds to the repertoire of the lens. Basically, a pop can will fill the frame almost entirely if desired.
Lens hood - Locking threads keep the hood firmly in place. Metal and rubber, long-term solution, nice touch to the package.
A note about bokeh - while this lens is not really in the catagory where bokeh is a question mark, shooting people at 35mm is not out of the question. As such, I've noted the bokeh is quite ordinary, though not bad. It is smooth and passable, but being 35/2.8 at it's best, it isn't going to knock your socks off. Close-focusing on smaller subjects can bring it out a little more.

On conclusion I tip my hat to Sony and Zeiss for producing a well-rounded, professional tool. Pleasure to use.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: beppe61   review date: August-12-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 17-35mm f2.8/4 D
Minolta 20mm f2.8 RS
CZ 24-70 f2.8 Vario Sonnar T*

price paid:

1300 euro (new)

positive:

Great sharpness and contrast
Great build quality
Great colors
Very fast and silent AF

negative:

None!

comment:

Great ultra wide angle lens for my A900!
It's very sharp, you can use this lens at TA!
Better than Minolta 20mm f2.8 RS at 20mm.
I love this lens!!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: shadowfax001   review date: May-27-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 70-200G
Sony 24-70Z
Sony 28/2.8
KM 17-35D

price paid:

1823.99 USD

positive:

Beautiful Colors
Very little/If any CA
Build Quality
Good resolving power

negative:

Some light fall-off wide open

comment:

I don't have a lot of experience with a zoom this wide (e.g. on the A900). To be sure, it will take many years to learn how to use it. My only observation is there is little to no CA using the 24-70Z or 16-35Z. As such, I now notice more CA with the 70-200G. The 70-200G just doesn't seem as special.

Best,

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: ibordas   review date: May-15-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 24-70 2.8
Minolta 20 2.8
Sony 50 1.4
Minolta 28-135 4/4.5
Minolta 17-35 2.8G

price paid:

1400 EUR (new)

positive:

Build quality
Sharpness
Color & IQ
Ultra wide angle

negative:

Little softness in extreme corners from 2.8 to 4

comment:

Really amaizing wide angle lens. Sharp, sharp sharp.. as zeiss always. (made me re-think my line up and sell the CZ 24-70)

Colors and contrast are simply great, also bokeh is very smooth.

AF is really fast and accurate. Balances really great with a900.

In extreme corners little light fall-off and softness can occur @ full apertures.

Amazing details with a900.
Highly recommended!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: RonaldJ   review date: May-12-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 24-70
M 100 2.8 Macro
M 20 mm 2.8
Sony 70-200 G 2.8

positive:

sharp from F4 onwards, 2.8 is good, build excellent
well balanced, nice format, it is not seen as a wideangle by the "public:, giving possibilities for street photography

negative:

none, price is high but you get what you pay for

comment:

this lens is in the same class as the FF lenses compared too although the 16-35 is better then the 20mm.
to get the best out of the lens you need to learn how to use it, as with all lenses. Then it is amazingly divers in usage.
Just walk around a day with only this lens to see what it is capable too.
sometimes not the expected results, then it is the photographer doing something wrong and not the lens.

Certainly worth the investment.

And you get a nice 24-50 on the a700

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: nemofin   review date: May-11-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

85Zeiss
135Zeiss

positive:

Amazing build quality.
Great AF, really fast.
Good colors and contrast.
Really good sharpness.

negative:

Little light fall-off in extreme corners at full aperture.
Little softness in extreme corners at full aperture.

comment:

Really good wide angle lens. Sharp, sharp sharp.. as zeiss always.
Colors and contrast are simply great, also bokeh seems to be quite nice.
AF is really fast and seems accurate. Balances really great with a900.
In extreme corners little light fall-off and softness can occur @ full apertures... but this is quite common for FF and such a wide and fast zooms.

Nikkor 14-24 is better in this, but they need to use totally differently designed front lens.. "like a footbal" ;)
This is a really good wide angle lens, sharp with fast AF and good colors/contrasts.. amazing details with a900. If you need only perfect IQ, be sure that extreme corners wont come a surprise @ full apertures, if you are ok with that, this lens is simply best money can buy!
Highly recommended!

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: samsonlo   review date: February-26-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Excellent build
Excellent sharpness
Excellent color
Excellent image quality

negative:

Heavy

comment:

full marks for this lens.
only a bit heavy

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Eoin   review date: February-25-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

ZA24-70
ZA85
ZA135
EF16-35L Mk I
CV 12mm 5.6

price paid:

L1040

positive:

Silky smooth zoom
Build quality
Image performance
Ultra Wide on FF

negative:

None

comment:

Super, super, super piece of glass. No flare seen yet, no CA or purple fringing in back lit situations. Sharp to every corner, minimal distortion. I'm really impressed with this latest Zeiss offering.

Price not to bad relative to EF 16-35 but not weather sealed.

Absolute keeper in my line up. If you need wide angle zoom, don't delay, it's here.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: frankieg   review date: February-25-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 17-35mm D, Sigma 10-20mm EX, Sigma 15-30 EX

price paid:

1799 USD NEW

positive:

Great build with very low distortion and the ultimate in sharpness for this type of lens. Great balance on an a900.

negative:

Wish they would foot the $5 bill for a hard case. It just blows me away how Sigma can provide such excellent cases with their lenses and the most Sony will do is provide a soft bag on their top of the line lens.

comment:

I have been waiting for this lens for some time and will wind up using it extensively to photograph interiors and exteriors of homes. I have used Sigma's and Minolta's in this range and there is no comparison. It is well balanced on an a900, a bit front heavy on an a700 and I can't imagine how it would feel on an a100. I would have rated it 4.5 on flare and distortion if those choices were available. Regarding flare there will be some but only under conditions where you would expect it and way less than the Sigma 15-30 or 10-20 or the Minolta 17-35 it's just unavoidable when you have a lens as wide as this. Regarding distortion, while I have not measured it with a pattern other than straight line interior surfaces, it has very little distortion. Only the slightest barrel distortion at the widest setting of the zoom. That distortion is much less than the Sigmas. The sharpenss of this lens is immediately apparent. I say this once again not from reviewing shots of test patterns but just from comparative use switching lenses for the same shot. If you can see the difference on the LCD viewscreen under full mag, then it's a keeper in my book. The build it what you would expect for this price. The feel of both the focus ring and the zoom ring is perfect in my mind. I however do not have experience with $1800 lenses so I have nothing to compare to in this range. I have recently used the Sigma 15-30 for this work and have been very please with that. Now this lens may not seem like it is worth four to five times the price for some people, but it is to me. True it is not 4 to 5 times the performance but there is no doubt in my mind this is a top performer.

Now anyone want to buy a Sigma 15-30mm?... I have to pay for this some how.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: benscrazy   review date: February-24-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony - AF DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6
Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 24-70 F2.8 ZA SSM

price paid:

12,500 HKD (new)

positive:

- Very sharp
- Very Fast
- Excellent Bokeh

negative:

- Price
- Weight

comment:

This is a perfect Portrait or Wide Angle Landscape lens. You won't be dissappointed.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: jkp1   review date: February-04-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF17-35/2,8-4D

positive:

I like the build and overall feeling. Smooth zooming and focus. F2.8 all way through focal lenghts.

negative:

More than one time i changed AF/MF by accident.
Price.

comment:

One day of testing in bad weather only, so please take care not to read this review as "the pure and only thruth".
Flare control not tested as conditions didnt provide the possibility to test, so i have just put in 5.
This is a very pleasant lens to use, both on A700 and A900.
Great sharpness. When comparing to my old and thrustworthy 17-35 minolta, the 16-35 seems better in all areas except physical size. Focus is snap on, colors seems colder than 17-35, but i think its more real. Sharpness at 16 mm is just so much better, specially in not-centered areas. And distortion seems less than the minolta.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: minman   review date: February-03-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

17-35G

price paid:

1,700 USD

positive:

Sharpness esp at center, neutral color rendition, exceptional build construction, SSM motor, fast zoom, close focus distant

negative:

A bit on the heavy side, sharpness at corner wide open could be better, pricy

comment:

The best ultra wide zoom lens for any A900 owner.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: gigo   review date: January-30-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 24/1.8EX DG
35/1.4G
2470ZA/2.8

price paid:

232000Yen

positive:

Resolution.
Sharpness.
Cubic effect(Atmosphere).

negative:

Price.
Size.
Weight.

comment:

In Japan, although sold to 1/29, I can seldom use by the rain continuation.
The good of 1735G/3.5 is still inherited, and I'm thought that the bad is improved.
It is worthy of balancing a price.